From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id 2C9AA385829B; Thu, 22 Sep 2022 11:12:52 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 2C9AA385829B
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1663845172;
	bh=rJJRRl0oRNhSt6S/xhzWZ9ii0+RzcHWR6zQAWAdvkEY=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=tYglWy33JHW436CIjupMGyaishyMspoAhw5QnS452ECKrrrdCr+tUrdIUvhN5zist
	 gzOx9H5nEDBZqt7M86BMIUneyRK4o1m/DGZZbc9nMHoluKsY0xfqaa+WOtA1V/0sk9
	 7NunkFK/kmqp3I+ispp11uy2gij0wkymjV55NWCE=
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/106950] Missed PRE full redundancy without
 post-loop use
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2022 11:12:52 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: tree-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Version: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: FIXED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status resolution
Message-ID: <bug-106950-4-N7kOJaPIm1@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-106950-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-106950-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D106950

Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED

--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The very specifc case was addressed now, I don't think it's worth keeping t=
his
open since it also lacks a specific simpler testcase for the PRE issue that
might still exist.=